LAXMI GRIH UDYOG Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under Section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Niyalaya (Khand Niyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, the appellants/petitioners assail the order dated 16-10-2006, passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 4671/06. The order of the Collector dated 19-7-2006 (Annexure-P/9) was assailed, by which the Collector had directed recovery of possession from the petitioners of the mortgaged property under the provisions of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

(2.) It was pleaded before the learned single Judge that as against the amount of Rs. 52,11,067/- claimed to be due, the petitioners had already submitted a proposal for settlement of account for a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- out of which the petitioners had deposited a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to indicate their bona fide. This proposal was, however, turned down by the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 has pointed out that although the first proposal had already been turned down, the petitioners repeated the proposal in the very sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- and, therefore, the same did not require any consideration.

(3.) In the context of the facts brought on record, the learned single Judge directed that if the petitioner submits a fresh representation to the respondent No. 2/Bank within a period of four weeks proposing to pay higher amount than the one proposed earlier, and pays RS. 5,00,000/- along with the representation, the respondent No. 2 shall take the said representation into account in accordance with the guidelines for settlement of accounts. It was further directed that pending consideration of the proposal, the petitioner shall further deposit a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- within two months thereafter in two monthly installments and after depositing Rs. 15,00,000/- in three months, the respondent No. 2/Bank shall dispose of the representation by passing a reasoned order.